Mbabane – Prime Minister (PM) Russell Mmiso Dlamini has accused the Finance Ministry of frustrating the review of procurement procedures.
The PM’s frustration is contained in the report of the Private and Cabinet Office, which provides responses to questions that were posed by Members of Parliament (MPs) during the debate of the second quarter performance report for the financial year 2026/2027.
In the report, the PM said the Ministry of Finance has failed to deliver despite government having pushed for the reforms for the past three years. The PM said Cabinet had repeatedly called for the review of procurement procedures, with his office even holding several meetings with the Ministry of Finance in an effort to ensure that the process was undertaken.
However, he said the ministry was letting government down, despite procurement being a major contributor to poor service delivery in the country.
During the debate in Parliament, the PM was asked about progress made in reviewing procurement procedures and when the Procurement Act would be reviewed and amended. “Cabinet has been calling for this from the Ministry of Finance for the past three years and the Prime Minister’s Office has held several meetings with the ministry for this review,” he said.
“Procurement is the main reason why there is poor service delivery in this country. However, the Ministry of Finance is letting us down,” the PM said. His response effectively placed the responsibility for the delayed reforms on the Ministry of Finance, which is expected to drive the review process.
The proposed review of procurement procedures is significant, considering the role played by the procurement system in the implementation of government projects, acquisition of goods and services and delivery of public infrastructure. Delays and inefficiencies in procurement processes have the potential to affect the execution of government programmes, with projects taking longer than anticipated to get off the ground.
Notably, in the Cabinet Retreat 2026 Declaration announced in February, government, through the PM, listed the review of the Procurement Act as a priority.
The process, according to the declaration, falls under what is referred to as ‘Flagship priorities, Ambitions and Bold Decisions’.
It was mentioned that Cabinet will champion flagship programmes that drive Eswatini’s transformation agenda geared towards achieving ambitious commitments as directed by the Speech from the Throne and the Programme of Action (PoA), taking bold decisions to enable positive impact to the lives of emaSwati.
According to the declaration, these priorities were to enhance the economic growth of Eswatini, targeting economic diversification, financial inclusion, public sector efficiency, youth empowerment and sustainable development. “These initiatives will be clearly owned, resourced and tracked, ensuring transparency, accountability and a legacy of institutional and developmental progress for the nation.
For all flagship priority areas highlighted from the Speech from the Throne, Cabinet will employ measures that will circumvent bottlenecks and enhance efficiency in achieving the desired outcome,” it was mentioned in the declaration. The review of the Procurement Act and development of a Procurement Policy was said to be something that had to be done by December this year.
Notably, during the portfolio committee debate of the Ministry of Finance’s second quarter performance report, questions were asked regarding government’s procurement processes.
In particular, the ministry found itself having to defend the high number of procurement opportunities awarded through Limited Tendering, saying the practice is largely driven by the use of established prequalification lists for recurring categories of goods and services.
Finance Minister Neal Rijkenberg explained that the relatively high number of limited tendering procurements was attributable to government ministries and departments relying on prequalified suppliers for services such as security, catering, promotional items and maintenance of computer equipment.
He was responding to a question in Parliament regarding why government procuring entities continued to favour limited tendering and single sourcing over competitive open tendering, despite the transparency requirements of the Public Procurement Act of 2011.
The question pointed to procurement figures showing that there had been 95 limited tendering openings and 25 single-sourcing openings, compared with only 31 open tendering openings.
Procurement method Openings
Limited tendering 95
Single-sourcing 25
Open tendering 31
The figures raised concerns about whether government entities were giving sufficient preference to open competition when awarding public contracts.
In his response, Rijkenberg said the use of prequalification lists was provided for under Regulations 112 to 114 of the Public Procurement Regulations of 2020, which establish the regulatory framework governing the process.
He explained that suppliers appearing on established prequalification lists had already undergone a competitive procurement process during which they were assessed and qualified to participate in subsequent procurement opportunities within their respective categories.
Consequently, he argued that the subsequent use of Limited Tendering among suppliers on such lists should not, in itself, be construed as a departure from the principles of competition and transparency. The minister further clarified that open tendering remained the preferred procurement method for establishing a pool of prequalified suppliers.
Limited tendering could then be used to invite suppliers from the established prequalification list, provided the process complied with the applicable procurement requirements.
Meanwhile, in May 2026, MPs signalled their intention to pressure Rijkenberg to expedite the review of the Public Finance Management (PFM) Act, 2017.
This was through a motion whereby Rijkenberg was reminded that the Act provides the primary legal framework for transparency, accountability and the sound management of public resources in Eswatini.
The motion noted that the auditor general reports continued to highlight significant irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, pointing to weaknesses in enforcement and compliance.
It further stated that the current PFM Act’s punitive and preventative provisions were not fully aligned with regional best practices within SADC, including the Public Finance Management Acts of South Africa, Namibia and Botswana.
“Strengthening the Act is critical to curb corruption, deter financial misconduct and restore public confidence in the management of state funds,” read part of the proposed motion.
In the motion, the mover raised several concerns, including that delays in amending the Act undermine Parliament’s oversight role, particularly that of the Public Accounts Committee, and limit the consequences for accounting officers who breach the law.
Secondly, the mover argued that Eswatini’s fiscal credibility and regional integration efforts require the harmonisation of public finance legislation with SADC standards.
In this regard, the House was urged to direct the minister to table, within 21 days from the date of adoption of the motion, a Public Finance Management Amendment Bill.
It is proposed that the amendment should, among other things, strengthen offences and penalties for financial misconduct in line with SADC regional standards and clarify personal liability and surcharge provisions for controlling officers and accounting authorities.
According to the motion, the amendment was to enhance provisions relating to the prevention, reporting and timely investigation of irregular expenditure, while further providing for mandatory disciplinary and criminal referral mechanisms where ag findings are not addressed.
The motion was moved by Somntongo MP Sandile Nxumalo and seconded by Nhlambeni MP Manzi Zwane.
